Federer remains the greatest player of all time no matter what people who have been watching Tennis from 1950's say. Consider these 1) Did Laver have an opponent with whom he palyed a epic 5 setter in a Wimbledon 2) Did anybody in Tennis history have an opponent who is also called one of the greatest players Tennis has seen. Federer has Nadal but whom did Laver, Budge, Borg or Sampras have. 3) What was the speed with which Laver was playing and the players on the Professional circuit play today. Todays big servers can win a match in aces even without giving a chance of play to Federer or Nadal. 4) Dominance of the sport for long years is also one criteria. People keep saying that Federer didnt have big opposition till Nadal came. they always forget that Federer defeated Sampras(14 Grand slams)in Wimbledon, defeated Agassi(5th man to win a career grand slam) in U.S. open and now Nadal who is considered one of the greatest players in Tennis. Isnt this enough for opposition. 5) Laver did not play as many tournaments as todays players do. The amount of travelling they do and the tight schedules they have require tremendous physical fitness. Did Laver reach so many consecutive Semifinals as Federer in Grandslams. 6) Last but not the least who started this criteria that winning a Grandslam in the same calendar year denotes the greatest player. Did Laver say that? I say the greatest player is who wins most Grandslams or who is No.1 for most weeks or Physical fitness.
Re: Federer
by karthick anand on Jun 23, 2009 08:53 PM
first who r u to decide the criteria for measuring the greatness of a player? and i must confess tht u have asked some funny questions here...best of all Federer beating Agassi thing..do u know tht Agassi was about 36 years old then? and was the only player to break federer's serve twice in the entire tournament...speaks something abt his competetion if u take out Nadal
Re: Re: Federer
by SREENU RAO on Jun 24, 2009 10:35 PM
Mister, I am asking the same question. who are you to decide that winning in a single calendar gives you the greatest title. I think you just read what I wrote with your eyes but not with your brain. Bad Luck
Re: Re: Federer
by Guest on Jun 24, 2009 04:20 AM
Nothing to comment on federer's greatness but want to correct some funny things mentioned by you.Borg and samprass has no oppenents is so funny. Borg has John Mcenroe & Jimmy connors. Arent they great players? Samprass has Agassi, Boris becker & stefen edberg. Aren't they great players? When it comes to Laver, It is very difficult to compare with a different generation game. He was not allowed to play from 1962 to 1969, as they hv restrictions based on ameture. So did put some funny facts to prove that roger is great. He may be greatest of all time. But dont mis judge other players.
Re: Re: Re: Federer
by SREENU RAO on Jun 24, 2009 10:33 PM
Mister Guest. What you said is right. But one thing you missed out is when I wrote about Borg, Sampras etc in point no. 2 it means that they did not have a player who is considered arguably the greatest atleast on one surface(i.e. Nadal on Clay)Bad that you also missed out but not as stupid as Mr. Karthick above. He is asking me back a question which I have asked every one as to how they say Laver is the greatest just because he has won all Grandslams in one calendar year. Na Jaane yeh log kahase aathe hain.
Re: Re: Federer
by SREENU RAO on Jun 24, 2009 10:29 PM
Mister, I am asking the same question. who are you to decide that winning in a single calendar gives you the greatest title. I think you just read what I wrote with your eyes but not with your brain. Bad Luck
we know murray has go a game to beat anyone.... but he is no need to shout it in front of the media that he gonna be crowned this year and all tat too he is choosing FEDERER to beat in finals...... better he do it rather than yelling off the court.... beating federer on grass in best of five sets..... someone need to wake up murray...better RAFA make a call and tell wat it takes to beat FEDERER on wimbledon final.....
I am a great fan of Roger Federer. I read in today's newspaper that he is half german and half southafrican. It's a well known fact now that south africans are chokers. is his southafrican connection got to do something with his choking against nadal. think abt it.
A modern military look and a military precision of his shots will make oppenents run for cover. One such opponent is already under cover with fake sore knees.
